Search results

This study aims to demonstrate which course elements were responsible for community building, fostering subjectification and learning for being in an online course on environmental and sustainability education (ESE) during the COVID-19 pandemic and physical distancing.

The study investigates a graduate-level course on Environmental Education for Sustainable Living that due to COVID-19 had to be taught mainly online. A retrospective analysis was conducted when the facilitators reflected on why the course, against expectations, appeared to have affected so many students in such a meaningful and profound way as shown by their personal reflections and the course evaluation. Methodologically, this study can be described as explorative and interpretative, although it was complemented by a standardised empirical analytical end-of course evaluation.

Within the context of this study, sense of community is linked to and facilitated by the online learning environment and the educators’ and students’ roles throughout the course. This study found that interaction and inclusion can be augmented by a hybrid educational design and supported by the mutual efforts of educators and students. Reflective tasks and discussions most prominently evoked subjectification. The encouragement of students to see themselves as central subjects and the inclusion of creative tasks supported both personal exploration and sense of community.

This study provides educational institutions teaching online with valuable information regarding course elements that foster subjectification and create a sense of community. This is particularly of interest for the design of online ESE emphasising learning for being and more relational approaches towards teaching and learning.

By envisioning the learning environment as an eco-social system, this study aims to map interrelated enablers of students’ sustainability-oriented learning (SoL) in the context of a university course at the interface of science and society.

A case-study approach was used to delineate what enables student learning in a university-wide transdisciplinary Master of Science course. A sample of 102 students, university and societal stakeholders participated to this study, by sharing their experiences and views through focus groups and questionnaires.

A main finding is the development of a configuration of six intertwined enablers that through their interplay help to cultivate students’ SoL, in the course under exploration.

This study paves the way for a re-orientation of how to explore learning in complex environments. It shows that adopting a relational, situated and systems approach is not only feasible but is also desirable to understand and guide learning practices in complex environments.

This study aims to bring together the available scattered knowledge about teaching and learning in Living Labs within higher education, and to explore their potential for supporting students’ sustainability-oriented transformative learning.

A literature review was conducted, applying a realist approach. A sample of 35 articles was analyzed qualitatively, mapping the data according to the realist constructs “context,” “intervention,” “mechanism” and “outcome” and using the constant comparison method for data analysis.

This study identified multiple characteristics of teaching and learning in sustainability-oriented Living Labs, namely, two socio-physical teaching and learning contexts, two pedagogical approaches as interventions therein, four learning processes as (potential) mechanisms and six sustainability-related learning outcomes. Two main challenges were also identified.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that brings together the scattered results from previous studies into a comprehensive description of characteristics and challenges of teaching and learning in Living Labs as sustainability-oriented learning spaces in higher education. The findings can support educators in making scientifically grounded informed choices for teaching and learning in Living Labs and inform future empirical studies to examine when, how and why certain characteristics of teaching and learning in Living Labs, as identified in this study, can support sustainability-oriented transformative learning in higher education.

This paper aims to introduce and investigate dialogic interaction as a key element of achieving a transition towards sustainability in people, organizations and society as a whole. Furthermore “sustainability competence” as a potential outcome of such interaction is to be introduced, referring to the capacities and qualities that people, and the organizations and communities of which they are part, need in order to address (un)sustainability.

The argument of the paper is grounded conceptually in emergent thinking among scholars preoccupied with learning‐based change and sustainability in organizations and communities. Empirically, the paper uses two case studies carried out by the authors to ground the argument in real efforts by communities to create a (more) sustainable way of living.

The main results include: a post‐normal understanding of sustainability highlighting uncertainty, complexity, normativity, controversy and indeterminacy; a framework facilitating dialogic interaction; and a number of key competences that appear conducive to both dialogic interaction and a transition to sustainability.

Although the two case studies are quite extensive and rigorous, the conceptual nature of the paper and the word limitation did not allow for a more detailed discussion of the methodology used in the case studies and the contexts in which the two case studies are located.

The paper adopts a post‐normal perspective of organizational transitions towards sustainability and focuses on dialogue and dialogic interaction as a key learning‐based mechanism for facilitating such a transition. Furthermore the framework for dialogic interaction allows for a more holistic approach toward such a transition and the development of competences needed to accelerate its realization.

The purpose of this paper is to identify components and educational design principles for strengthening sustainability competence in and through higher education.

This is a conceptual paper that uses an exemplary autobiographical empirical case study in order to illustrate and support a line of reasoning.

A number of “Gestalts” of mind‐sets of sustainability competence and key elements of the learning processes needed for developing such competence have been identified.

This is one of the first papers to consider sustainability competence from a transformative social learning perspective. The value of the paper lies in its potential to help teachers of university courses in re‐designing their educational processes with sustainability competence in mind.

It is higher education’s responsibility to continuously challenge and critique value and knowledge claims that have prescriptive tendencies. Part of this responsibility lies in engaging students in socio‐scientific disputes. The ill‐defined nature of sustainability manifests itself in such disputes when conflicting values, norms, interests, and reality constructions meet. This makes sustainability – its need for contextualization and the debate surrounding it – pivotal for higher education. It offers an opportunity for reflection on the mission of our universities and colleges, but also a chance to enhance the quality of the learning process. This paper explores both the overarching goals and process of higher education from an emancipatory view and with regard to sustainability.

This paper aims to examine the textual coverage of the topic of public engagement in leading English language sustainability textbooks.

In this paper, the authors’ findings are based on a content analysis of 12 textbooks published between 2005 and 2015. The authors generated the sample through three sources: a review of the offerings of five major academic publishers, title searches of academic databases and an examination of the syllabi compiled by AASHE. Texts that displayed a high degree of disciplinarity or those that were narrowly focused were rejected. A list of a priori codes was established in which the authors expected to find in the indices of the texts. This resulted in 21 expected a priori codes for which the authors assessed the sample texts to gauge the place of engagement in these materials.

The authors find that only two textbooks contained ten or more references to engagement. Overall, very little attention was paid to the ways in which individuals, groups or institutions can engage in action for a sustainable society. The authors argue that substantive changes in the writing of textbooks are necessary to provide students with comprehensive training on why engagement is critical. More diverse writing teams, attention to cultural obstacles and mindfulness of the politics of difference are recommended.

Practical implications include pedagogical methods aimed at better-informed students knowledgeable of the importance of public engagement in the sustainability transition.

Social implications include a more dynamic socially sustainable educational experience for students, which is aligned with cutting-edge scholarship.

The authors know of no other research devoted to the analysis of engagement in contemporary sustainability textbooks. The authors hope to encourage writers of sustainability textbooks and their editors to incorporate more robust social science scholarship on pivotal topics such as how social change and action intersects with sustainability. Second, the authors seek to broaden a conversation about the role of public engagement in sustainability-focused textbooks and curricula.